Site icon JONATHAN TURLEY

Do Good Politics Make for Good Grammar? Users of Grammarly Receive Prompts on Supporting Ukraine

This weekend, I had a curious experience in writing my column on the Hill discussing whether Ukraine committed environmental crimes in the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines and then lied to its allies while receiving billions in aid. While writing the column, the Grammarly program automatically ran to check for typos. Suddenly, a message from the company popped up in the box for possible grammar problems. It was actually a message about my need to support Ukraine.

I actually support Ukraine and, in the column, I repeat my view that this is an unjust war by Russia against a sovereign nation. Furthermore, it is being prosecuted in violation of international law standards and modern principles of the laws of war.

However, I do not look to corporations to tell me how to be a better person, whether it is the NFL, Disney, or Grammarly. While I support Ukraine, many do not in terms of either spending hundreds of billions on the war or supporting the underlying territorial claims. People are fully capable of judging the merits for themselves without corporate nudges in their morning lattes or edits.

Nevertheless, as I was working out the nits on the Ukraine column, up popped my corporate reminder to stay faithful to Ukraine — a surprising note in a column suggesting that Ukraine may have committed a criminal act against NATO allies and then lied about it.

Yet, there was a political suggestion where a grammatical suggestion was supposed to be.

We still do not know much about the conspiracy, and both Russia and Ukraine have been accused of “false flag” operations. However, a recent warrant issued by a German court is zeroing in on Ukraine as the possible culprit.

The message asked if I would join the company in fighting for Ukraine:

 

 

 

 

Once again, Ukraine had me “at hello” on the issue, but not from a company that I pay to check my spelling, not my political viewpoints.

After hitting the x, the company allowed me to return to editing.

Notably, Grammarly was reportedly developed in Ukraine by Alex Shevchenko, Max Lytvyn, and Dmytro Lider. It is now valued at $13 billion as a company.

I have written to Grammarly to confirm some information.

First, I am not sure if there are other political causes championed by the company through its editing system.

Second, I was not certain whether the system recognized that I was writing about Ukraine before inserting the message in the editing box. Ironically, the column was not favorable toward Ukraine on this issue, but the message still encouraged me to check out ways to support the country.

Third, I could not find any option to turn off corporate political messaging.

Finally, I would like to know if the company does business in Russia and whether such messages would appear for users supporting the war against Ukraine.

As a supporter of Ukraine, I still do not support Grammarly offering political tips with editing tips. I will let you know if the company responds to my queries.

Now, there is the final irony. When I was about to post this column on Grammarly pushing me to support Ukraine (as I wrote a column on Ukraine), the same message popped up in the edit box asking me again to support Ukraine (as I wrote a column on Grammarly asking me to support Ukraine).

 

 

 

 

This would seem to confirm that Grammarly is noting the subject of my writing and using the editing software to promote aid for Ukraine (regardless of the thrust or position of the column). I have never had prior such political tips appear in the editing box.

Once again, I fail to see why the NFL cannot focus on football and Grammarly cannot focus on grammar. Trust me, with my typos at 5 am every morning, there is ample work for Grammarly to do.

 

 

 

Exit mobile version